Species interactions in an Andean bird–flowering plant network: phenology is more important than abundance or morphology

Biological constraints and neutral processes have been proposed to explain the properties of plant–pollinator networks. Using interactions between nectarivorous birds (hummingbirds and flowerpiercers) and flowering plants in high elevation forests (i.e., “elfin” forests) of the Andes, we explore the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Oscar Gonzalez, Bette A. Loiselle
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: PeerJ Inc. 2016-12-01
Series:PeerJ
Subjects:
Online Access:https://peerj.com/articles/2789.pdf
_version_ 1797418378553458688
author Oscar Gonzalez
Bette A. Loiselle
author_facet Oscar Gonzalez
Bette A. Loiselle
author_sort Oscar Gonzalez
collection DOAJ
description Biological constraints and neutral processes have been proposed to explain the properties of plant–pollinator networks. Using interactions between nectarivorous birds (hummingbirds and flowerpiercers) and flowering plants in high elevation forests (i.e., “elfin” forests) of the Andes, we explore the importance of biological constraints and neutral processes (random interactions) to explain the observed species interactions and network metrics, such as connectance, specialization, nestedness and asymmetry. In cold environments of elfin forests, which are located at the top of the tropical montane forest zone, many plants are adapted for pollination by birds, making this an ideal system to study plant–pollinator networks. To build the network of interactions between birds and plants, we used direct field observations. We measured abundance of birds using mist-nets and flower abundance using transects, and phenology by scoring presence of birds and flowers over time. We compared the length of birds’ bills to flower length to identify “forbidden interactions”—those interactions that could not result in legitimate floral visits based on mis-match in morphology. Diglossa flowerpiercers, which are characterized as “illegitimate” flower visitors, were relatively abundant. We found that the elfin forest network was nested with phenology being the factor that best explained interaction frequencies and nestedness, providing support for biological constraints hypothesis. We did not find morphological constraints to be important in explaining observed interaction frequencies and network metrics. Other network metrics (connectance, evenness and asymmetry), however, were better predicted by abundance (neutral process) models. Flowerpiercers, which cut holes and access flowers at their base and, consequently, facilitate nectar access for other hummingbirds, explain why morphological mis-matches were relatively unimportant in this system. Future work should focus on how changes in abundance and phenology, likely results of climate change and habitat fragmentation, and the role of nectar robbers impact ecological and evolutionary dynamics of plant–pollinator (or flower-visitor) interactions.
first_indexed 2024-03-09T06:32:54Z
format Article
id doaj.art-5267508c17be47659f50e5e0331147bc
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2167-8359
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-09T06:32:54Z
publishDate 2016-12-01
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format Article
series PeerJ
spelling doaj.art-5267508c17be47659f50e5e0331147bc2023-12-03T11:03:11ZengPeerJ Inc.PeerJ2167-83592016-12-014e278910.7717/peerj.2789Species interactions in an Andean bird–flowering plant network: phenology is more important than abundance or morphologyOscar Gonzalez0Bette A. Loiselle1Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of AmericaWildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of AmericaBiological constraints and neutral processes have been proposed to explain the properties of plant–pollinator networks. Using interactions between nectarivorous birds (hummingbirds and flowerpiercers) and flowering plants in high elevation forests (i.e., “elfin” forests) of the Andes, we explore the importance of biological constraints and neutral processes (random interactions) to explain the observed species interactions and network metrics, such as connectance, specialization, nestedness and asymmetry. In cold environments of elfin forests, which are located at the top of the tropical montane forest zone, many plants are adapted for pollination by birds, making this an ideal system to study plant–pollinator networks. To build the network of interactions between birds and plants, we used direct field observations. We measured abundance of birds using mist-nets and flower abundance using transects, and phenology by scoring presence of birds and flowers over time. We compared the length of birds’ bills to flower length to identify “forbidden interactions”—those interactions that could not result in legitimate floral visits based on mis-match in morphology. Diglossa flowerpiercers, which are characterized as “illegitimate” flower visitors, were relatively abundant. We found that the elfin forest network was nested with phenology being the factor that best explained interaction frequencies and nestedness, providing support for biological constraints hypothesis. We did not find morphological constraints to be important in explaining observed interaction frequencies and network metrics. Other network metrics (connectance, evenness and asymmetry), however, were better predicted by abundance (neutral process) models. Flowerpiercers, which cut holes and access flowers at their base and, consequently, facilitate nectar access for other hummingbirds, explain why morphological mis-matches were relatively unimportant in this system. Future work should focus on how changes in abundance and phenology, likely results of climate change and habitat fragmentation, and the role of nectar robbers impact ecological and evolutionary dynamics of plant–pollinator (or flower-visitor) interactions.https://peerj.com/articles/2789.pdfAndean birdsEcological networksElfin forestNectarivoryPhenology
spellingShingle Oscar Gonzalez
Bette A. Loiselle
Species interactions in an Andean bird–flowering plant network: phenology is more important than abundance or morphology
PeerJ
Andean birds
Ecological networks
Elfin forest
Nectarivory
Phenology
title Species interactions in an Andean bird–flowering plant network: phenology is more important than abundance or morphology
title_full Species interactions in an Andean bird–flowering plant network: phenology is more important than abundance or morphology
title_fullStr Species interactions in an Andean bird–flowering plant network: phenology is more important than abundance or morphology
title_full_unstemmed Species interactions in an Andean bird–flowering plant network: phenology is more important than abundance or morphology
title_short Species interactions in an Andean bird–flowering plant network: phenology is more important than abundance or morphology
title_sort species interactions in an andean bird flowering plant network phenology is more important than abundance or morphology
topic Andean birds
Ecological networks
Elfin forest
Nectarivory
Phenology
url https://peerj.com/articles/2789.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT oscargonzalez speciesinteractionsinanandeanbirdfloweringplantnetworkphenologyismoreimportantthanabundanceormorphology
AT bettealoiselle speciesinteractionsinanandeanbirdfloweringplantnetworkphenologyismoreimportantthanabundanceormorphology